wiretap arguments are going on in court (nuclear bomb used to justify)

[rodeodance]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060906/ap_on_go_pr_wh/domestic_spying_lawsuit;_ylt=Agpix_cNlqAKCN3mYRIxyl.yFz4D;_ylu=X3oDMTA0cDJlYmhvBHNlYwM-


Lawyer defends wiretapping program

By LARRY NEUMEISTER, Associated Press Writer Tue Sep 5, 10:34 PM ET

NEW YORK - A government lawyer used a dramatic scenario of a nuclear attack on Washington to illustrate his arguments Tuesday in defense of
President Bush's warrantless wiretapping program.


Anthony Coppolino, a special litigation counsel based in Washington, said the Constitution gives Bush the right as commander in chief to do what is necessary to surveil terrorists and stop them from attacking the United States, including interrogating someone who might have information about an imminent attack.

"Suppose for example the president obtains intelligence that a nuclear bomb was planted ... right there in Washington, and the only way he was going to find out whether that was going to happen was to grab the person and interrogate him," Coppolino said in U.S. District Court in Manhattan. "Would that be in his constitutional authority? I would say so."......MORE (interesting)

[C_U_L8R]

1. Suppose the excuse of a nuclear bomb & terrorism

is used to spy on and supress political opponents.

The crooks need to obide by the law.. and get warrants.

[acmavm]

2. bush** can't even say nuclear let alone deal with the necessary

intelligence to find a dirty bomb.

[HereSince1628]

3. Ah, the illogic of FEAR.

Ain't life in Orwellian America just grand?

[rodeodance]

4. "Coppolino said Bush did not need to check with Congress first"

.........Coppolino's arguments grew ever more dramatic as he was challenged by the judge over the limits of presidential authority and whether Bush could eavesdrop on the phone conversations of Americans without Congressional and judicial approval.

He said the surveillance program was essential in the war against terrorism in finding the enemy and was "as close to a modern battlefield as you can get: Where is al-Qaida? Where do they want to hit us?"

Lynch cited complaints that the surveillance program intrudes on Americans and was operating in the face of a Constitution that generally permits Congress to overrule the president with a two-thirds majority.

Coppolino said Bush did not need to check with Congress first to monitor phone conversations of suspected terrorism operatives because the Constitution directly gives him the "power to detect the activities of an enemy attempting to attack the United States."

[MissMillie]

5. if you don't hand over your freedoms, you'll be dead!

the politics of fear....

Remind people that once they start handing over the 1st, 4th, and 5th amendments, the 2nd won't be long to follow... that'll scare THEM!